- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Breaking: SCOTUS approves use of Pentagon funds for Border Wall
Posted on 7/26/19 at 8:35 pm to AggieHank86
Posted on 7/26/19 at 8:35 pm to AggieHank86
quote:So to whom said litigants appeal?
So, it looks increasingly likely that this ruling turned entirely upon the standing of the Sierra Club, and that litigation will continue vis-à-vis litigants with more substantive standing claims.
2
Posted on 7/26/19 at 8:37 pm to Diamondawg
Guess Mexico is not paying for wall
Posted on 7/26/19 at 8:37 pm to WPBTiger
Ok, that’s actually a bit much winning for one week. 
Posted on 7/26/19 at 8:45 pm to ThePTExperience1969
quote:On occasion, you say something that is actually worth reading. This is not one of those occasions.quote:Which should be immediately shut down WITH PREJUDICE upon filing, the POTUS is CONSTITUTIONALLY and STATUTORILY empowered to DO THIS. There is no standing when the US Code and Constitution emphatically forecloses on stuff like this. Any judge who entertains lawsuits against the Constitution and US Code should be automatically impeached.
that litigation will continue vis-à-vis litigants with more substantive standing claims.
Posted on 7/26/19 at 8:46 pm to jrodLSUke
quote:
Ok, that’s actually a bit much winning for one week.
If you can’t handle the winning, get out of the country.
Posted on 7/26/19 at 8:47 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
that litigation will continue vis-à-vis litigants with more substantive standing claims.
Who would these litigants actually be? The only ones I can reasonably foresee are those filing Takings Clause claims under 5A.
Posted on 7/26/19 at 8:48 pm to Diamondawg
quote:Regardless of whether litigants with actual standing claims pursue their litigation in the 5th circuit or the 9th circuit, the case will end up in front of SCOTUS
So to whom said litigants appeal?
Posted on 7/26/19 at 8:50 pm to ThePTExperience1969
quote:The property owners that you describe would not have standing to challenge the spending under the NEA. They would only have standing to challenge the taking of their own property and the price paid under eminent domain.
Who would these litigants actually be? The only ones I can reasonably foresee are those filing Takings Clause claims under 5A.
The extant litigants in question, as I recall, are several state governments, plus (I think) the house of representatives.
As I recall, all of those lawsuits were stayed, pending the appellate process in the Sierra Club case. those stays, in my opinion were foolishness, because anyone with half a brain would have recognized the standing issues which became problematic in the Sierra Club case.
This post was edited on 7/26/19 at 9:00 pm
Posted on 7/26/19 at 8:51 pm to TygerTyger
quote:
Most of the downvotes are because we just don’t fricking like you.
So cheer up!
He’s a chickenshit ambulance chaser. He’s a vile lawyer. No wonder he is such an insufferable little prick that everyone hates.
Posted on 7/26/19 at 8:54 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
The property owners that you describe when I have standing to challenge the spending under the NEA. They would only have standing to challenge the taking of their own property in the price paid under eminent domain.
Thanks for repeating my post
quote:
The extant litigants in question, as I recall, are several state governments, plus (I think) the house of representatives.
Why would they have standing under the NEA? The NEA DOESN'T GIVE STANDING TO ANYONE
it's a presidential-empowering law
Posted on 7/26/19 at 9:08 pm to Wtxtiger
quote:You are quite the angry little cipher, aren’t you?
He’s a chickenshit ambulance chaser. He’s a vile lawyer. No wonder he is such an insufferable little prick that everyone hates.
Posted on 7/26/19 at 9:12 pm to WPBTiger
Posted on 7/26/19 at 9:20 pm to PhDoogan
Why did you post Trump making a jackass of himself in WWE?
Is that the one that sticks out in your mind when you think of Trump?
Is that the one that sticks out in your mind when you think of Trump?
Posted on 7/26/19 at 9:26 pm to 225bred
Dude.
It’s only a matter of time before they revive nullification.
It’s only a matter of time before they revive nullification.
Posted on 7/26/19 at 9:31 pm to AggieHank86
I just have no love for lawyers. Lawyers have caused the changes in this country for the worse for the last 100 years that have limited state’s rights, grew federal power and taken God out of our public life. I hate what liberal lawyers have done and you are a liberal lawyer. When a liberal can’t get what they want through legislation, they bastardize the law and use like mined cronies to inflict their Marxist desires on the rest of us. Just look what the Hawaii judge and 9th circuit has done.
Posted on 7/26/19 at 9:42 pm to Wtxtiger
Don’t you worry tiger, I’m as small govt originalist as they come and anticipate my bar license in a couple of months, we have to fight fire with water when it comes to these types. Ultimately, it really comes down to getting as many Federalist Society members on the bench as possible and Trump’s thankfully doing that.
Posted on 7/26/19 at 10:49 pm to Plx1776
Why do people keep talking about lower judges in NY or Hawaii overturning this?
Honest question: how can a lower judge prevent something the SCOTUS ruled on when they’re the highest in the land?
Honest question: how can a lower judge prevent something the SCOTUS ruled on when they’re the highest in the land?
Posted on 7/26/19 at 11:07 pm to WPBTiger
A great victory indeed tonight
Posted on 7/26/19 at 11:12 pm to Placebeaux
The liberals are melting down about this on Twitter. “How can the president use defense funds for a border wall????”
These are blue check supposed media members.
These are blue check supposed media members.
Posted on 7/26/19 at 11:14 pm to pwejr88
quote:
Honest question: how can a lower judge prevent something the SCOTUS ruled on when they’re the highest in the land?
Thomas has already warned the lower courts. You may see some fireworks if they keep trying that shite.
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News